TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Amablue Archive

View 0 posts and 63 comments by Amablue on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

The jobs that we lose overseas are the low skill ones. A stronger workforce is capable of taking on higher skill jobs. We can automate away the low skill jobs anyway if they don't go overseas. Those jobs are going away one way or another. Besides, fears of losing our jobs are overblown - our unemployment rate is at a perfectly reasonable level.
/r/MensRights16/09/16 07:28 AM
1

You don't want to maximize the quantity of children, you want o maximize the children raised in good households. That means parents who are involved in their children's lives, and fathers who bond with and are involved with their child early on tend to continue to be more involved.
/r/MensRights16/09/16 07:18 AM
2

I was just pointing out that the same rationale can be used to justify plenty of things. Sure, but that doesn't make the argument any weaker, it just means that if those other things we can justify with that logic are determined to be bad, they're bad because of some other factor that's strong enough to overcome the benefits. I've made both economic and moral arguments in this thread, I just focused on the economic aspect more because people seemed to be making primarily economic based objection…
/r/MensRights15/09/16 07:58 AM
3

Are you suggesting that SS won't pay out?
/r/MensRights15/09/16 07:11 AM
2

I think it's pretty disingenuous to compare being an employee to being an indentured servant. Especially when we're talking about people who are in stronger places in the workforce. It sucks when you're poor and you have to take whatever job you can get to get by. But when you have skills that are in demand you're not at the whim of your employer - it's the other way around. You are the one being sought after, and you have your pick of whichever one is willing to treat you the best, pay you the …
/r/MensRights15/09/16 07:08 AM
4

That has positive externalities. I mean, think about driving a car. It's a personal choice, but it's not without consequence. It pollutes the environment by some small amount. So we tax drivers to deal with that negative externality. We can then use that tax revenue to put toward cleaning the environment. Having children that are well raised has a strong positive effect for our society, and it's something we want to be easier to do. The more children that we raise in strong families the better o…
/r/MensRights14/09/16 10:56 PM
5

I don't care much about the up or downvotes either way. But I feel strongly that parental leave for both parents is better both from an economic point of view and from an equality point of view, and I'd like to change your view on this topic if you're open to listening to the arguments. It helps men be a bigger part of raising children, and reduces the expectation that women be the ones to stay at home. It means more freedom for men and women to choose to raise their family how they want, it mea…
/r/MensRights14/09/16 10:28 PM
7

Because, like I said, having children is a big positive externality for the economy. It helps the nation as a whole when we make it easier to raise children well. It leads to stronger families, which produce stronger more well adjusted individuals, which in turn become better workers in the workforce of tomorrow. The economy benefits when we help parents raise their children, and I want to enjoy those benefits 18 years from now. Consider this game: There are 10 people in the room. You have two b…
/r/MensRights14/09/16 09:22 PM
6

Why do you feel that way? Children are a huge positive externality. Everyone benefits when we have a stronger workforce, and parental leave helps raise the next generation of workers.
/r/MensRights14/09/16 08:23 PM
1

Oh, I thought you were talking about in the US
/r/TheRedPill14/07/14 10:05 PM
1

What I do have a problem with is quotas in a work place. I'm fairly certain this is illegal. Do you know any place that actually does this?
/r/TheRedPill14/07/14 09:26 PM
2

It sounds like you're arguing that people get flack for stepping outside what is considered normal for their gender, which I totally agree with. We should work to end that sort of behavior, whether it's taunting the girl messing with a unix command line or the guy dancing to the sugarplum fairy suite.
/r/TheRedPill14/07/14 09:18 PM
2

The question is why they don't get excited. Is it biology? Is it due to a lack of role models? Is it due to gender roles? Is it due to unconscious bias that is shaping their interests? It's ridiculously hard to isolate the source of behaviors in the first place. Anyone claiming to know what the cause is with any real level of certainty (especially when their evidence is based on anecdotes) is kidding themselves. Until we have a complete and working model of the mind that can explain behavior to …
/r/TheRedPill14/07/14 09:00 PM
2

The idea isn't for force women into certain fields. It's to find if there are any barriers to entry (whether they're cultural, institutional, or otherwise) and remove them. If women are choosing to not enter a field at the same rate as men, we ought to identify why they're making that choice.
/r/TheRedPill14/07/14 03:54 PM
14

And rightly so, it was not a thread where he wanted to have his view changed. He outright stated he was there to correct misconceptions.
/r/MensRights13/05/14 03:43 PM
2

I'm a mod of a decently sized sub, and I've seen that there are plenty of bots and trolls who lack the half of the brain necessary to do that checking. Even if it's trivial to bypass, lots of people don't think to, and that means fewer trolls and bots to worry about. What people can do and what they actually do are different - and only the latter is what matters.
/r/MensRights06/05/14 04:54 AM
2

A banned person or bot knows to create a new account to continue trolling. A shadowbanned troll or bot can go on harmlessly posting for months without realizing that no one is seeing them.
/r/MensRights06/05/14 12:21 AM
4

There's nothing wrong with wanting to hear opposing viewpoints. Suggesting that no other viewpoints are worth considering isn't something to espouse.
/r/MensRights31/03/14 05:09 PM
3

There are plenty of legitimate criticisms of TvW, but I don't think TF hits on nearly any of them. At about 2 minutes in, he calls the title a strawman (it isn't). He then goes on to say that these games were (1) not designed to keep feminists happy, (2) not designed to subjugate women, and (3) were made for profit. All three of those points completely miss the mark. Sarkeesian doesn't argue that games should endeavor to keep feminists happy as their goal, she's arguing that there is sexism in g…
/r/MensRights21/11/13 05:58 PM
3

I'm not the biggest fan of TvW, but holy mother of god Thunderfoot's rebuttal videos are terrible. I'm embarrassed that they even exist.
/r/MensRights20/11/13 09:10 PM
16

It ends with turtles. Drunk turtles, all the way down.
/r/MensRights04/09/13 12:13 AM
4

When was that?
/r/MensRights13/08/13 09:41 PM
11

The admins don't care bout SRS that much, if at all. From here You have a hard time accepting how little we (and the rest of the site) care about SRS. They're certainly not an existential crisis like you guys make them out to be. [...] I engaged here in /r/SRSsucks because moderators were excusing racist harassment in another subreddit (that doesn't even have anything to do with SRS) with a weak "SRS does it!" argument. What am I going to yell at the SRS mods for? Excessive sarcasm? Honestly, I …
/r/MensRights06/08/13 07:10 PM
18

You're talking about this post: http://www.reddit.com/r/SRSsucks/comments/1gz1zd/but_we_all_know_srs_isnt_a_downvote_brigade_right/caq0q1a Which is a totally normal place to use the phrase, as he is directly referencing the phrasing in the SRS's rules in a thread about SRS breaking their own rules. Getting upset over that is ridiculous.
/r/MensRights06/08/13 05:39 PM
0

Unless it affects someone else's bodily autonomy. It would be one thing to let the child die. But it's different if you actively kill it. The right to bodily autonomy take precedence over someone else's right to life, in all cases. We've already been over this. If there were a way to do it to the child's body without affecting the mother, he would have the right to do it, because the mother has the right to do it. This is literally impossible though, as pregnancy is a medical condition, and ther…
/r/MensRights17/05/13 06:47 AM
0

That is NOT bodily autonomy, so if that is the reason you choose to get an abortion, then you are not exercising your bodily autonomy. No, bodily autonomy means you can do what you want to you body, for any reason or no reason at all. If that reason is because you can't afford the child that is perfectly acceptable. The right to bodily autonomy does not mean "You can do whatever you want to your own body, as long as you do if for these reasons". If the father cannot afford the child he can do wh…
/r/MensRights17/05/13 06:29 AM
0

The mother has the right to do it for those reasons other than bodily autonomy, so the father does as well. You don't know what the right to bodily autonomy entails, do you? It means you have the right to, for example, make medical decisions for your own body. It does not mean you get to make medical decisions for other people. It does not mean you get to keep money that you worked for or anything like that. That fetus is not his body. The mother is not his body. He has no authority over her.
/r/MensRights17/05/13 06:21 AM
1

In one case she is defending herself. In the other case she is defending her bank account. In one case she is exercising he right to bodily autonomy. In the other case she's neglecting a child which does not rely on her body for sustenance. What are you talking about 'defending her bank account'. There's no such thing as defending your bank account from a child. Isn't that what this father was trying to do? Wasn't he trying to defend his bank account? If the father did not want to pay, he should…
/r/MensRights17/05/13 05:55 AM
3

I don't understand how your ladder analogy applies. That is not what bodily autonomy refers to.
/r/MensRights17/05/13 05:26 AM
-3

The sperm is not his body. It is a product of it, but it is not a part of it.
/r/MensRights17/05/13 05:25 AM
0

I fail to see how that is a problem.
/r/MensRights17/05/13 05:24 AM
-1

Were your actions directly responsible for that other person being in the predicament he is in? In particular, was it entirely your decision that he be hooked up to you? In fact, was it not only was it your decision, but was it the case that you actually went so far as to force him to be placed in this situation in which his continued existence now entirely depends upon your continued willingness to allow him to make use of your body? Even if it was entirely my fault, the law would not (and shou…
/r/MensRights17/05/13 05:18 AM
1

The difference is that in once case keeping the baby alive requires her to forfeit her right to bodily autonomy, and in the other case it doesn't.
/r/MensRights17/05/13 05:10 AM
0

You're going off on a tangent that I don't think is really relevant to the discussion above. I don't think this is the place to have the conversation. But yes, I do support legal paternal surrender.
/r/MensRights17/05/13 05:08 AM
-1

And no, if someone shoots your or stabs you and it fucks up a kidney, but doesn't kill, its an assault, not murder. I didn't state otherwise... When you have sex, its implied that you're accepting the chance of pregnancy and allowing a fetus into you, and some may argue that choosing that doesn't give you the right to kill it. Accepting that you may get pregnant doesn't mean consenting to be pregnant. When I go swimming I accept that I might get pulled out to the ocean by a rip tide but it doesn…
/r/MensRights17/05/13 03:15 AM
-1

Let me amend that statement. If at any time I choose I do not want to be hooked up to this other guy, it is my right to leave even if I initially consented to him being hooked up to me. My right to my body is absolute and I am free to change my mind about things that affect it. It sucks for the other guy, but he has no right to use my body. My argument is that the law is consistent here - I have the right to make medical decisions about my own body even if it kills another because it is not my r…
/r/MensRights17/05/13 12:22 AM
-7

Either a second trimester fetus is a person, and terminating it is murder, or it's not a person, and terminating it is not murder. If someone is sick and hooked up to my kidney for life support against my will, it is not murder for me to unhook him and leave him to die. It doesn't matter if it's a person or a fetus, other people do not have a right to use my body and I can leave them to die if I wish. It is killing, but it is not murder. That is the rationale for abortion, whether or not it is a…
/r/MensRights17/05/13 12:06 AM
1

The best example being a costume design sketch for the Zero Suit which specifically said "DO NOT MAKE HER WEAR HIGH HEELS". Do you have a link to that sketch? I'd like to see it.
/r/MensRights13/03/13 12:11 AM
5

Ten men, 9 never get sex, the last has sex with ten women. Average sex partners: 0.1 (0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+1)/10 Might want to check your math there: (0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+10)/10 = 1 In both cases the average is 1.
/r/TheRedPill16/02/13 07:16 AM
8

You (legally) cannot consent while drunk. I don't necessarily agree with that, but that's the answer.
/r/MensRights21/01/13 12:36 PM
5

The way it's supposed to work is that a downvote means the comment does not contribute to the discussion, and an upvote means a comment is worth seeing, even if it's something you disagree with.
/r/MensRights21/01/13 12:35 PM
1

You can also buy fake cameras for cheap as well, if you're just looking for deterrence.
/r/MensRights20/01/13 06:51 AM
1

Facts are just a tool of the patriarchy.
/r/MensRights13/01/13 12:33 AM
15

Feminism means many things to many people. I'm not going to tar and feather someone just because they say they are a feminist. Saying that tells me about as much as if I told you I was an atheist. You can make all kinds of assumptions about what I actually believe, but unless you actually dig in you'll find you know very little about my actual beliefs.
/r/MensRights02/01/13 07:43 PM
-2

Yeah, he said exactly what I would hope the CEO would say: reddit doesn't shut down dissent or things you find uncomfortable, reddit encourages discussion to move things forward. Regardless of his personal views (nothing I saw seemed objectionable by the way) he's managing reddit the right way.
/r/MensRights02/01/13 07:41 PM
1

That sounds like it would be an interesting read. Do you have a link?
/r/MensRights24/12/12 08:20 AM
2

I disagree with that to an extent. Up and downvotes alone are not enough to keep a productive tone in a sub like this - often things that can be quickly consumed and that elicit a strong emotional reaction will get the most upvotes. If you want to have a more thoughtful productive community, there needs to be some level of moderation.
/r/MensRights09/11/12 10:22 PM
14

Your anecdote doesn't match the data. The fact of the matter is that many doctors are hesitant or unwilling to perform the operation on women.
/r/MensRights13/09/12 06:01 PM
10

Yeah, but PObLtIiCE just doesn't roll off the tongue.
/r/MensRights12/09/12 04:30 PM
1

You're thinking of dwarfs.
/r/MensRights26/08/12 11:36 PM
40

If a woman makes a unilateral decision to bring pregnancy to term, and the biological father does not, and cannot, share in this decision, he should not be liable for 21 years of support … autonomous women making independent decisions about their lives should not expect men to finance their choice. Feminist Karen DeCrow. I grabbed the quote from this article
/r/MensRights02/08/12 04:10 PM
1

Because your engagement was so news worthy and out of the ordinary? Exactly the opposite, its not news worthy. And who cares how out of the ordinary it is, it's not news. People were shot up in a movie theater during TDKR - that's news. It affects a lot of lives. People died. Some couple gets engaged afterward - that's not news, that's a stones throw away from celebrity gossip. It doesn't affect anyone else, it's not important in the same way that the shooting itself was. Who cares if he's the g…
/r/MensRights27/07/12 11:18 PM
2

Sorry, this is only personal if it happened in their own home. The hell it is. I proposed to my fiancee in a public restaurant, that doesn't mean I should have the press all over me judging me or my fiancee for our decisions or actions. These people were in the Aurora shooting. That's newsworthy. What they did before or after that is not. Turning their personal lives into a gossip column so we can judge them for the actions they took during a crisis without knowing them, their history, who they …
/r/MensRights27/07/12 08:10 PM
7

I really don't care what they do, and I hate that people are even talking about it. These are the personal lives of people, it shouldn't be up for scrutiny by the general public so that they can pass judgement.
/r/MensRights27/07/12 06:26 PM
6

The dictionary doesn't decide the definition of words, it only reflects the definition of words.
/r/MensRights21/07/12 10:53 PM
6

I don't know if sexist is the right word, but I definitely feel it's inappropriate and doesn't belong in a professional product. This came up in /r/linux and I made a post on it there, so I'll just quote myself It's not so much a matter of that one thing being offensive, it's just part of a culture of immaturity. I wouldn't want to work at a place that had that sort of thing show up regularly, especially if I was a woman. I mean, I work at a game studio, and we're not exactly known for being sup…
/r/MensRights21/07/12 06:23 AM
16

Why, just today I walked past a girl that was attractive, and I thought "Gee, I wonder, should I rape this girl?" Luckily I thought of this PSA and realized that no, I should not rape her. Thanks feminism!
/r/MensRights21/07/12 06:15 AM
19

I've been looking for this quote for a few days now, and I finally re-found it. This is a quote from the feminist Karen DeCrow if a woman makes a unilateral decision to bring pregnancy to term, and the biological father does not, and cannot, share in this decision, he should not be liable for 21 years of support … autonomous women making independent decisions about their lives should not expect men to finance their choice. I'm kind of surprised more people don't hold this view. (I found the quot…
/r/MensRights16/07/12 04:10 PM
0

Dude, I've stated why twice now, do I need to keep repeating myself? No one refers to people with ear piercings as being mutilated. No one refers to having your leg amputated as mutilation. No one refers to removing skin off your body for grafting as mutilation. Mutilation is a word used when you want to get an emotional reaction out of someone.
/r/MensRights13/07/12 02:17 PM
0

Thank you Dr. Halibut, I'll go tell my family doctor right away. Clearly you have a better grasp of my family's medical situation based on the statistics you read on the internet.
/r/MensRights13/07/12 01:32 PM
0

My point was that no one uses the word mutilation unless they want to get an emotional reaction. I understand that it fits the literal definition of the word, but there are also connotations that factor in to word choices.
/r/MensRights13/07/12 01:30 PM
-1

My brother needed to be circumcised when he was very young (Not a baby, but not much past being a toddler IIRC) for just the reason you list, he simply couldn't retract his foreskin. I've never read any positive aspects of circumcision that weren't rooted in preference or religion. If you've seen some article or study please post a link, I would like to read it. I don't think I suggested there was, did I?
/r/MensRights12/07/12 08:56 PM
-1

The reason I have a problem referring to it as mutilation is because sometimes it is a necessary medical procedure. I've seen people say that there is literally no circumstances where circumcision is okay, and that's wrong. I understand that it fits the literal definition, but I've never seen anyone refer to other medical procedures as mutilation unless they wanted to get an emotional reaction. I'd rather just stick to rational arguments as to why its bad than to try to persuade people via word …
/r/MensRights12/07/12 04:36 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter